TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 13 °C Monday 20 May, 2013

Lowry loses High Court defamation appeal against Sam Smyth

The High Court rejects Lowry’s claims that comments by Sam Smyth on TV and in print had defamed him.

Image: Leon Farrell/Photocall Ireland

INDEPENDENT TD and former minister Michael Lowry has lost a High Court appeal against broadcaster and journalist Sam Smyth over allegedly defamatory comments made against him.

High Court president Justice Nicholas Kearns rejected Lowry’s application for a summary order under the Defamation Act 2009, after Lowry had claimed Smyth had no arguable defence for the statements.

Lowry had originally brought the case to a Circuit Court in February of last year, but his application had been rejected on that occasion.

Lowry had contended that language used by Smyth on an episode of TV3′s Tonight with Vincent Browne on June 24, 2010 could be understood to mean that Lowry was a thief, corrupt, dishonest and an untrustworthy politician unfit to be a TD or minister.

In that TV3 exchange, Smyth said Lowry had been caught “with hand in till” and that he had “allowed the biggest business in the country to pay for the refurbishment of his home”.

He also said an article published in the Irish Independent the previous month – which included the line, “the total value of all the property transactions involving Mr Lowry was around stg£5 million” – would be interpreted as indicating Lowry had unlawfully benefited from property transactions by awarding a mobile phone licence to Esat while Lowry had served as Minister for Communications.

Lowry had sought a declaration that the statements were false and defamatory, and sought corrections in respect of both publications and an order prohibiting those statements from being published again, as well as summary relief against Smyth.

The court was told that Lowry had written to Smyth on July 30, 2010 to seek an apology and correction from him, but that Smyth had declined to do so.

Smyth claimed, in response, that the words he used were a fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest. His Irish Independent article needed to be read in conjunction with the proceeding paragraphs which he said referred to the investigations of the Moriarty Tribunal and its findings of September 2005.

‘Roadmap’

In respect of the words broadcast on TV3, Smyth said his words related to the fact that the lengthy trail of investigations into Lowry’s affairs – culminating in the Moriarty Tribunal – emanated from the fact that Lowry was found to have engaged in tax evasion and to have lied about his business and financial affairs.

In his ruling, Justice Kearns noted that although the wording of the Act – which provides for a correction to be broadcast or carried – appeared to be addressed to newspapers or TV, Lowry had not joined either Independent Newspapers or TV3 in his application.

He noted Lowry’s argument that Smyth’s arguments relied on the findings of the Tribunals, which themselves are inadmissible in other proceedings, and Smyth’s defence that Lowry’s inferred meanings were incorrect, as well as his claim that the statements were true, and also that Smyth was entitled to express an honest opinion on matters of public importance.

Justice Kearns said the fact that tribunal findings were inadmissible in other courts did not mean that could not provide a “roadmap” for other persons with an interest in its inquiries.

He said that Lowry himself had admitted that he had not paid tax on Dunnes Stores’ €395,000 refurbishment of his home, the subject of the original TV3 remarks, and that Smyth did not need to rely on Tribunal findings to argue this point.

With regard to the Irish Independent story, the judge said Smyth could have argued that pointing out a tribunal’s investigations into a possible link between the property transactions and Lowry’s awarding of the phone licence.

The phrase “hand in till” could have referred to the bills inappropriately picked up for Lowry’s benefit by his business interests, and his failure to pay tax on that amount, the justice said.

“It seems clear that the defendant has a good arguable case in respect of both publications,” Justice Kearns said.

Read: Michael Lowry refuses to resign after official request

More: In full: Micheal Lowry’s Dáil statement on his property dealings

Read: Lowry labels Moriarty “a scandal of truly epic proportions”

Read next:

Comments (52 Comments)

  • Nothing Sam Smyth said was untrue. Everyone knows Lowry is one of the most corrupt

    Reply
    • And yet he got re-elected. What does that say about his constituents?

      Reply
    • Noddy what you say is so true, it beggars belief, what kind of people live in his constituency?
      Is there no one else in all of that constituency that could be an honest politician and representative the people rather than looking after bo 1?

      Reply
    • Rob 10/02/12 #

      Now i’m no fan of Lowry by any stretch! And am fully aware what people think of him!

      but i start to feel uneasy when Sam Smyth and others can breezily ramble about things that a tribunal after years were unable to prove!

      i’m not saying it doesn’t stink! but that doesnt mean we can publicly go around stating these things as fact either.

      the media have been wrong before in case we forget!! doesn’t Sam Smyth work for the same paper that said Liam Lawlor was with a prostitute in Russia?? do i need to go on with the list??

      Reply
    • D Burns 10/02/12 #

      @Marguerite
      The honest politician thing in your comment was joke of the year!!! Lol ;-)

      Reply
    • Rob 10/02/12 #

      20 dislikes yet no one has anything to say in response?

      Reply
    • Rob, I don’t know what you expect people to say.

      You’re “uneasy” about journalists being able to make statements that the court have concluded and neither defamatory or untrue. Most people are perfectly happy for the press to be able to make true, un-defamatory statements about corruption in politics.

      Reply
    • Not a fan of him either but I have a problem with the pot calling the kettle black! I am a North Tipperary constituent and I didnt vote form him for obvious reasons but having said all that he is the only politician in this area that actually gets things done plus you will see him regularly around talking to folks not like the the lot who I voted for and who only show up at election time and are now above in Dublin shafting us all.

      Reply
    • @ D Burns, I still live in hope & believe that there is no alternative to democray.
      Call me naive, idealistic but what we take for granted…..democracy many countries around the world are still hoping &/fighting for?

      Reply
    • Rob 10/02/12 #

      @Peter – it seems fairly clear to me that SS was in fact trying to imply other things from his words and in his article also – and wasn’t limiting his comments to the specific Dunnes payment which we all know did in fact happen.

      genuinely i dont know who has more power in this country – the corrupt politicians or the media! the only thing i like about the politicans is that the people already dont trust them – yet we eat and drink what we’re fed in the media as if its gospel!

      i accept your point though that the court decision makes it more of a fact that no one was defamed here.

      Reply
    • I say it best when I say nothing at all ??

      Reply
    • @Rob: You claim SS was “in fact trying to imply other things”.

      1. On what basis do you claim this is factual?
      2. SS didn’t imply anything: you drew an inference.
      3. On what basis is this nonsense “clear”?

      Your contribution offers nothing on SS or this case but rather a lot on your own presumptuousness. You commit the crime you wrongly accuse SS of.

      Reply
    • Rob 10/02/12 #

      @Biggins – u really about to tell me i’m the only one commenting on here on things that are more broad than SS and this case??

      Reply
    • Someone mentioned that lowry was voted back as he got things done; and that is true in itself, but the ONLY reason that happened was that he was the 1 VOTE that the Ffing Failurs needed to pass whatever they were voting on at the time…………. so he bargained and got what he wanted for his vote…………

      Is that white elephant of a casino complex still going ahead? I can’t believe a centre of gambling should be built anywhere in this country. Our society has been ruined enough by gambling; both in home where there are gambling addicts who can now do it online; don’t even have to leave the house; and of course we all know about the int’l gamblers currently affecting us…………….

      A couple of commentators mentioned the press should be more cautious in their reporting; whilst I do agree that all reporting should be fair and accurate, these kind of things are usually commonly known amongst “the great and the good and the meeja” and are often hinted at in the press, but not really written or spoken about…… We ordinary people are of course kept out of that loop…………. we only get to pay for it….. ;-(

      Reply
    • Interesting that Lowry didn’t join Independent or TV3 to the proceedings…

      Reply
  • Lowry had contended that language used by Smyth on an episode of TV3′s Tonight with Vincent Browne on June 24, 2010 could be understood to mean that Lowry was a thief, corrupt, dishonest and an untrustworthy politician unfit to be a TD or minister.

    Yes and his point

    Reply
  • Nice one, now we can all officially say that Lowry “got caught with his hands in the till” without fear of being sued for defamation.

    It’s a good day for Irish journalism.

    The Truth hurts Michael but suck it up

    Reply
  • The fact that Lowry could afford to hire legal counsel to bring a case like this to the High Court just shows how overpaid politicians are.

    Reply
  • High Court judge confirms what the world already knew! Now, people of Tipp. North, do your bit to help cleanse Irish politics………..

    Reply
    • and what about the rest of the counties LOL! All politicians are liers and power hungry scum. Lowery pissed off the wrong guys in power and he has been paying for it ever since. Not saying he is honest, he is most certainly not!

      Reply
    • Will, I have to say that that’s exactly the sort of stance that allows corrupt politicians to get away with it.

      I know from talking with voters in N Tipperary that those individuals, at least, continue to vote for Lowry because they think that all politicians are equally corrupt and that, by that logic, there’s *no point* in getting rid of Lowry because his replacement will be just as bad. He also plays on the idea that he’s being singled out and victimized by a hostile party leadership and is therefore ‘the little guy fighting for the people’.

      But while it’s true that politics will always attract corruption the idea that all politicians are corrupt or even, if you like, *equally* corrupt -even if used scathingly against politicians – ultimately just creates a situation where corruption is considered normal and acceptable.

      Reply
    • Hi Peter, just for the record I didnt vote for Lowery for obvious reasons like I said on one of the comments below. But the reason North Tipperary people vote for Lowery is not because of ‘better the devil you know’ but it’s because he just doesn’t appear at election time and magically disappears again; he is out and about all the time and believe it or not he is one of the few that actually gets things done around these parts!

      Reply
  • He is a true gangster

    Reply
  • My Friday just keeps getting better, it’s a leap year, might be the best chance of getting Lowry imprisoned?

    Reply
  • HA!!!!
    I’m fuckin delighted!!!

    Reply
  • I thought in order to be defamed there has to be a communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. My opinion of Lowry hasn’t changed before or after the article

    Reply
  • Hopefully this is the start for a lot of politicians getting dragged through courts and all the dirty laundry comes out for the public to see really who they are

    Reply
  • Friday made. Hopefully that will be that.

    Reply
  • Hey Lowry, you suck. Happy Friday.

    Reply
  • Lowry is a fully paid up scumbag.

    Reply
  • Imagine the arrogance of this guy bringing anybody to court for mistruths. He couldn’t even be true to his wife and yet he stands up and legislates for the rest of us!! We are worse — but then again we have AA few like him eg Quinn, Healy Res, Flynn, etc.

    Reply
  • A very sensible ruling from the Court. Various tribunals have cost the taxpayer probably a couple of billion. Much of that expenditure was unnecessary if various politicians had simply up their hands and admitted that many times they preferred putting out their hands. The government has run away from making any significant statements on the last tribunal report on the phone license. No wonder politicians feel safe from real scrutiny and accountability. Just look at how the ‘independent’ TDs soak up the unvouched 40k ‘leaders’ allowance each year. If you gross that up it is equivalent to about a 70k salary, throw in employer PRSI, etc. and the average small business would have to come up with 80k. Doubt if any of the soaks think about that.

    Reply
    • The Mahon Tribunal created 17 millionaire lawyers………………..

      completely agree with your post Adam and also the tone. It’s a disgrace that ANYONE can claim almost twice the national industrial wage, on top of a salary of almost 4 times the NIW ……………..

      (as an aside: One of college friends moved to Dublin on a salary of 50k after graduation; her fiancée lived in W Cork so she drove down every Friday evening, back up Sun eve/Mon morning, lived in Dublin during the week, saved for a wedding & mortgage and lived her life – on her 50k salary. I find it VERY STRANGE that our TDs from W Cork need OVER 50k on top of salary to do much the same thing.)

      Reply
  • The majority of the defamation cases are heard by a jury in the High Court.
    Lowry has not the courage to argue his case before twelve of the “plain people” – I wonder why!

    Reply
  • If only there was enough evidence to prosecute Lowry and O brien!! And then again, even if there was! Would the will exist to go after them?

    Reply
  • Clearly, this man must be very socially adept and in possession of vast quantities of superficial charm. Otherwise, how could he keep on getting reelected?.

    Reply
  • The guy was involved the the whole idea of a multimillion casino in rural Tipperary as an idea to promote tourism! Come on get real!

    Reply
    • Isn’t one of the easiest ways of laundering money is on the black jack tables or similar?
      Why wouldn’t he want a casino in his back yard & to be the pollie to make it happen…well valhalla!
      More muala!

      Reply
  • Ciaro 10/02/12 #

    Will hourihan, stop excusing illegal and corrupt acts.

    Reply
  • Listen the ordinary people of Ireland, it makes no difference what we think or say “They” still get there obscene salaries and multiple pensions and are just laughing at us as they sit on the jacks content with themselves !

    Reply
  • So, he has lied about his tax affairs. He was caught and showed no remorse. He seems to have an abundant supply of superficial charm. He appears glib and superficial. He does not appear to empathise with the ordinary people of Ireland. Somewhere in the back of my mind, I seem to remember that these psychological traits are reminiscent of a psychological disorder that is, at the
    very least dangerous.

    D

    Traits

    no

    Reply
  • Dario Fo 11/02/12 #

    Well if Justice Kearns agrees…. It must be true…

    Reply
  • “Lowry had contended that language used by Smyth on an episode of TV3′s Tonight with Vincent Browne on June 24, 2010 could be understood to mean that Lowry was a thief, corrupt, dishonest and an untrustworthy politician unfit to be a TD or minister.”

    I guess some people hate the truth, huh?

    Reply

Add New Comment